[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Proposed language to address suspending a PDP

[Ron Andruff]

Dear all,

I tend to support Anne's analysis on both points and would bring back to
everyone's attention that the VI-WG PDP is an example of how a deadlocked
PDP came to an end.  Board intervention.

Kind regards,

RA

Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.


 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 4:54 PM
To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Proposed language to address suspending
a PDP


Hi,

I bet you are right.  How could the g-council suspend something ordered by
the Board, since they have not choice about initiating it in the first
place.

I had a similar first reaction to the reasons, but since the g-council that
approved the PDP, assuming other than a Board ordered PDP, would have to get
a supermajority to suspend/kill, they would be attesting to the seriousness
of that impasse or whatever.

avri

On 24 Jul 2012, at 18:06, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:

> My question would be whether GNSO actually has authority to suspend a PDP
that has been requested by the ICANN Board and if so, what is the source of
that authority?  I have not checked the By-Laws as to the prior existence of
the GNSO's authority to terminate a PDP so I don't know the origins of the
authority for the addition of "or suspend".
> 
> I am also concerned that the stated reasons seem to be very accepting of
the notion that we will experience completely ineffective PDP processes and
that seems counter to the spirit of the organization.  For example, if a PDP
is commenced on WhoIs, how easy will it be to reach a consensus on that one?
By listing these examples, do we create a sort of justification for giving
up on an issue that seems too difficult?
> 
> Thank you,
> Anne
> 
> <image001.gif>Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
> Of Counsel
> Lewis and Roca LLP . Suite 700
> One South Church Avenue . Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
> Tel (520) 629-4428 . Fax (520) 879-4725
> AAikman at LRLaw.com . www.LewisandRoca.com/Aikman
> 
> 
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> 
> This e-mail contains legally privileged and confidential information
> intended only for the individual or entity named within the message.
> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the 
> agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or 
> copying of this communication is prohibited.  If this communication
> was received in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and delete the
original message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:00 AM
> To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org
> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Proposed language to address suspending a
PDP
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> Following on from the last meeting, please find hereby the proposed
language to be added to the PDP Manual to address suspending a PDP after
initiation:
> 
> The GNSO Council may terminate or suspend* a PDP prior to the publication
of a Final Report only for significant cause, upon a motion that passes with
a Supermajority Vote in favour of termination or suspension. The following
are illustrative examples of possible reasons for a premature termination or
suspension of a PDP:
> 1. Deadlock. The PDP Team is hopelessly deadlocked and unable to identify
recommendations or statements that have either the strong support or a
consensus of its members despite significant time and resources being
dedicated to the PDP;
> 
> 2. Changing Circumstances. Events have occurred since the initiation of
the PDP that have rendered the PDP moot, or no longer necessary, or
warranting a suspension; or
> 
> 3. Lack of Community Volunteers. Despite several calls for participation,
the work of the PDP Team is significantly impaired and unable to effectively
conclude its deliberations due to lack of volunteer participation.
> 
> * Suspension is a time interval during which there is a temporary
cessation of the PDP, i.e. all activities are halted upon a decision of the
GNSO Council until further notice.
> This would be a modification of the current language of section 15 of the
PDP manual (modified language in bold).
> 
> Looking forward to receiving your feedback.
> 
> With best regards,
> 
> Marika
> 
> 
> For more information about Lewis and Roca LLP, please go to
www.lewisandroca.com.
> Phoenix (602)262-5311	    	Reno (775)823-2900
> Tucson (520)622-2090	    	Albuquerque (505)764-5400
> Las Vegas (702)949-8200	    	Silicon Valley (650)391-1380
>  This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
replying to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone.
>  In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you
that if this email contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended
or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the
purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.